• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Subject: Re: Resources Redeemed
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 14:38:23 -0800
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EEEACEB8@h...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EEEACEB8@h...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> Thus, the biases, intentions, philosophies, behaviors, applicable contexts 
> such as background, social commitment, discussion, negotiation, 
> and exceptions are proper topics of study of resources.  One does 
> not study the resource by determining what it is but by what it 
> does.  

Hm... almost.  The Web Architecture doesn't say what a resource is, just 
how you name and talk to them.  RDF and humans can reasonably talk about 
what a resource is.  Good turn of phrase though.  -Tim

• References:
  • Resources Redeemed
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: XML parser bencmark to compare .NET parser and Java parser?
• Next by Date: Re: XML parser bencmark to compare .NET parser and Javaparser?
• Previous by thread: Resources Redeemed
• Next by thread: XML parser bencmark to compare .NET parser and Java parser?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread